autox
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: AP proposal in NAP

To: mark@sirota.org, evolution-discussions@yahoogroups.com,
Subject: Re: AP proposal in NAP
From: pethier@isd.net
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 13:56:51 -0600
>--On Tuesday, March 15, 2005 9:23 PM -0600 pethier@isd.net wrote:
>>Are these weights with or without driver?
>Without, as is indicated in that same section of the proposal.

Mark!  You cured my blindness!

I agree with the writer in the NAP this month that weighing without the
driver unfairly penalizes both light cars and heavy drivers.

>> If I was really optimistic, the little pushrod might put out 120 HP.
>> This is 12.8 pounds/HP.
>
>Right, but a built AP car will likely be putting out considerably more
>power from a motor of the same size.  Like, probably double.

Hmm, so no breaks for pushrod engines.

>> Engine modifications are apparently unrestricted.  Does this mean that
>> you can use any engine you like?
>
>Yes.

This pretty-much sucks.  If your car has no headliner, plan on swapping in
a twin-cam engine from someplace.

>> Does this ruleset essentially mean that any car is allowed in AP, or is
>> there a list of eligible cars?

>> I am not allowed to run in SM2, but anyone can come into AP?
>Right.

See the "sucking" comment above.

No reflection on Mark, of course.  I know HE didn't write these idiotic
rules.

So, if these rules go into effect, when would it be?

Phil Ethier






<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>